Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: tonyb on July 05, 2012, 05:35:PM
-
see below....
Posts: 12589
How to lay hands on the photographs / negatives of Sheila on the bed...
« on: June 25, 2012, 09:26:PM »
How to lay hands on the photographs / negatives of Sheila on the bed...
Information to follow:-
(1) - ask Mike Tesko to produce photograph, and rely on informant producing other photograph
(2) - Ask Home office to release copy it confiscated in 2003
(3) - ?
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 09:30:PM by mike tesko »
as the topic is locked and i'm sure we all dying to know, anyone any ideas
pointless asking Mike as he's happy where JB is it seems
(1) - mike will not produce it,i'd suggest can't but i won't.
(2) - pointless,Mikes already has a copy (see above)
(3) - there is no copy.
(4) - there is,and never has been,the photo as suggested,showing the proof of a single bullet wound.
I ask one other question.
Mike is obviously gaining somthing through the continuing incarceration of JB.
any suggestions,if you think im wrong please suggest why im wrong?
-
see below....
Posts: 12589
How to lay hands on the photographs / negatives of Sheila on the bed...
« on: June 25, 2012, 09:26:PM »
How to lay hands on the photographs / negatives of Sheila on the bed...
Information to follow:-
(1) - ask Mike Tesko to produce photograph, and rely on informant producing other photograph
(2) - Ask Home office to release copy it confiscated in 2003
(3) - ?
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 09:30:PM by mike tesko »
as the topic is locked and i'm sure we all dying to know, anyone any ideas
pointless asking Mike as he's happy where JB is it seems
(1) - mike will not produce it,i'd suggest can't but i won't.
(2) - pointless,Mikes already has a copy (see above)
(3) - there is no copy.
(4) - there is,and never has been,the photo as suggested,showing the proof of a single bullet wound.
I ask one other question.
Mike is obviously gaining somthing through the continuing incarceration of JB.
any suggestions,if you think im wrong please suggest why im wrong?
I'll go with (4) above. I'm happy to be proven wrong!
-
I'll go with (4) above. I'm happy to be proven wrong!
Wrong choice...
-
Wrong choice...
I'm sure you'll unlighten us Mike...... ;D
-
Photographs of Sheila on the bed were obtained by COLP as part of its 1991 / 1992 investigation. Although they did not copy them there is documentary proof that previously undisclosed photographs taken by Essex police existed, but COLP did not take the opportunity to copy them, or make any reference in their findings to their existence or significance, because it was not in their remit....
-
Could they be "previously undisclosed" mortuary photographs, say, rather than photographs of Sheila on the bed in the farmhouse?
-
Could they be "previously undisclosed" mortuary photographs, say, rather than photographs of Sheila on the bed in the farmhouse?
No, because the mortuary photographs are listed in the schedule produced by COLP...
-
because it was not in their remit....
That old chestnut, also favoured by an understaffed under resourced and under pressure CCRC.
Could they be "previously undisclosed" mortuary photographs, say, rather than photographs of Sheila on the bed in the farmhouse?
This has been suggested before. But how would it be possible for Mike Tesko to mistake the one for the other?
-
That old chestnut, also favoured by an understaffed under resourced and under pressure CCRC.
This has been suggested before. But how would it be possible for Mike Tesko to mistake the one for the other?
The same way he mistook a back to front photograph of the main bedroom for Sheila's bedroom?
-
The same way he mistook a back to front photograph of the main bedroom for Sheila's bedroom?
Point taken :-[ And dont mention the infamous sand v sunlight argument ;D
-
Point taken :-[ And dont mention the infamous sand v sunlight argument ;D
and Sheila's arm on the kitchen floor...
-
and Sheila's arm on the kitchen floor...
That was a suggestion, not a claim.
-
Schedule of photographs produced as part of COLP investigation, lists all the photographs, including the ones taken at the mortuary, the ones taken at the scene (beforehand), and it then lists a large number of other pictures which they did not bother to copy - at least COLP acknowledged that these existed in 1991 / 1992. Jeremy's legal team would be well advised to seek out the un-copied photographs which COLP documents refer to, since amongst these are photographs of Sheila and June on the bed, of Sheila on the bed, and the various crime scenes before police stage managed the scene, including also photographs taken during the training exercise with the bodies of the victims still in situ...
Go for it, I say - go on make my day!!!
-
Does the list of pictures that COLP did not copy, which you describe as being part of a schedule of photographs produced as part of the COLP investigation, describe at least one of the uncopied photographs as depicting Sheila on the bed in the main bedroom?
-
I suggest that such a photo of Sheila on the bed does in fact exist. Why? because (1) Ann Eaton's statement where she says quite clearly that she was told by a police officer that Sheila was in fact on the bed. (2) That Mikes statement that he has seen such a photo agrees with Ann Eaton's statement and (3) Because Mat also testifies that there is such a photo in existence. 3 independent witnesses is counted to be reliable testimony in a court of law. In fact it would be rated over and above the prosecution's star witness.
-
I suggest that such a photo of Sheila on the bed does in fact exist. Why? because (1) Ann Eaton's statement where she says quite clearly that she was told by a police officer that Sheila was in fact on the bed. (2) That Mikes statement that he has seen such a photo agrees with Ann Eaton's statement and (3) Because Mat also testifies that there is such a photo in existence. 3 independent witnesses is counted to be reliable testimony in a court of law. In fact it would be rated over and above the prosecution's star witness.
I'd like to believe (1) but AE could easily of misunderstood what she was told.
I don't believe(2) as mike also states he has a copy,but will not produce it.this compounds the lie IMO.
Mat... Mmm (3) not sure,not sure at all.
Do you think mike withholding the photo is beneficial to the defence G ?
Obviously it's difficult to have an opinion,as you haven't seen them. But the photo Mikes got shows SC lying on the bed,showing one bullet wound.the second shot being administered after this shot was taken.
People who have PM'd agree this is vital to the defence but there is a distinct lack of encouragement from the usual suspects for Mike to do the right thing......
-
Hi Grahame how does Mat know the photo of Sheila on the bed exists?
-
A court order should be sought for the files relating to the case held at Special branch HQ...
-
A court order should be sought for the files relating to the case held at Special branch HQ...
Or your hard drives?
-
Or your hard drives?
Go for it...
-
Go for it...
Mike,I'm not the one who claims to have the picture. I wouldn't want to be accused of wasting police time.... ;)
-
Mike,I'm not the one who claims to have the picture. I wouldn't want to be accused of wasting police time.... ;)
so, how does it work when the police are wasting their own time, and falsifying evidence and using all manner of excuses not to have to produce the evidence they already have possession of? A bit of a corrupt system, don't you think - how can anyone easily bring themselves to trust those who work under such a corrupted system which is only really interested in protecting the image of the state and all its agencies and those who operate within it?
Wasting police time? I say let them go for it I will have my day in court...
-
how can anyone easily bring themselves to trust those who work under such a corrupted system which is only really interested in protecting the image of the state
Bang on. You see this attitude in all sorts of British institutions. Local Authorities are no better. It's all about brushing things under the carpet, executives being nice to other executives rather than facing issues head on and calling each other out. Smile and nod in a lame, understanding manner. Perfect breeding ground for corrupt decay.
Sorry, I just fancied a rant.
-
so, how does it work when the police are wasting their own time, and falsifying evidence and using all manner of excuses not to have to produce the evidence they already have possession of? A bit of a corrupt system, don't you think - how can anyone easily bring themselves to trust those who work under such a corrupted system which is only really interested in protecting the image of the state and all its agencies and those who operate within it?
Wasting police time? I say let them go for it I will have my day in court...
Mike, I share this journey you're on of my own volition. From a point of uncertainty I now believe in Jeremy's innocence and what you're trying to do for him. However, you go too far, for me, when you accuse a whole group per se, namely Freemasons, of corruption. By so doing, you attack some of my friends and relatives, who are good, decent people. I'm fully aware that no group of people is perfect, there are rotton apples in every barrel, iin every agency, in every strata of society that can be named, but IMO, just like this forum, proportionally, there is more good than bad, but not certain the balance is quite the same over all forums.
-
so, how does it work when the police are wasting their own time, and falsifying evidence Without the silencer, blood, and paint evidence the case against Jeremy collapses...and using all manner of excuses not to have to produce the evidence they already have possession of? A bit of a corrupt system, don't you think - how can anyone easily bring themselves to trust those who work under such a corrupted system which is only really interested in protecting the image of the state and all its agencies and those who operate within it?
Wasting police time? I say let them go for it I will have my day in court...
Not just the law Mike,the evidence and proof you have to spring JB,when are they going to be produced?
-
Bang on. You see this attitude in all sorts of British institutions. Local Authorities are no better. It's all about brushing things under the carpet, executives being nice to other executives rather than facing issues head on and calling each other out. Smile and nod in a lame, understanding manner. Perfect breeding ground for corrupt decay.
Sorry, I just fancied a rant.
You're quite right about " your rant ",Roch. It's a sad indictment of how this country's run.
-
Not just the law Mike,the evidence and proof you have to spring JB,when are they going to be produced?
I have the copy evidence that could / will spring Jeremy from prison, I will do what needs to be done when the time presents itself, I refuse to be bullied by anyone trying to force me to do anything, rightly or wrongly - if I make the wrong move at the wrong time, it's all over for Jeremy, so I am waiting for the right moment. I am still waiting to receive confirmation that Essex police and the DPP/CPS deny the existence of such a photograph or a series of photographs showing Sheila on the bed, and June Bamber and Sheila on the bed...
Copy evidence is only admissible if the original is no longer available...
Think about it?
-
Bang on. You see this attitude in all sorts of British institutions. Local Authorities are no better. It's all about brushing things under the carpet, executives being nice to other executives rather than facing issues head on and calling each other out. Smile and nod in a lame, understanding manner. Perfect breeding ground for corrupt decay.
Sorry, I just fancied a rant.
A justified rant, Roch, but what, in your opinion, is the common demoninator? I feel there must be one even though I don't share Mike's view of what it might be.
-
Mike, I share this journey you're on of my own volition. From a point of uncertainty I now believe in Jeremy's innocence and what you're trying to do for him. However, you go too far, for me, when you accuse a whole group per se, namely Freemasons, of corruption. By so doing, you attack some of my friends and relatives, who are good, decent people. I'm fully aware that no group of people is perfect, there are rotton apples in every barrel, iin every agency, in every strata of society that can be named, but IMO, just like this forum, proportionally, there is more good than bad, but not certain the balance is quite the same over all forums.
I was only generalizing, I know there are good freemasons, and good police officers, and good civil servants, and good Judges, and good people in all walks of life, good CCRC workers, including Commissioners, good members of the public, good witnesses, good DPP / CPS employees, but unless they are in the firing line which makes all the decisions it means and accounts for nothing, it is those who find themselves in the firing line who I seek to judge and make judgement upon - sometimes the good ones are not in the firing line...
For good reason, I would suggest...
-
Hi Grahame how does Mat know the photo of Sheila on the bed exists?
Ask him Susan.
-
Ask him Susan.
Of course it (they) exist, I would be willing to take a lie detector test if someone else pays for it...
-
I have the copy evidence that could / will spring Jeremy from prison, I will do what needs to be done when the time presents itself, I refuse to be bullied by anyone trying to force me to do anything, rightly or wrongly - if I make the wrong move at the wrong time, it's all over for Jeremy, so I am waiting for the right moment. I am still waiting to receive confirmation that Essex police and the DPP/CPS deny the existence of such a photograph or a series of photographs showing Sheila on the bed, and June Bamber and Sheila on the bed...
Copy evidence is only admissible if the original is no longer available...
Think about it?
Mike, you've already waited 9 years for there reply,perhaps that's long enough for there response. I'm sure you could word a letter that will elicit a response?
Does a wait that long for a lack of response indicate that there not going to respond?
I would of thought the proof that SC was alive on the bed with JB outside with the coppers on the front of the papers will probably move the case into focus with the public and ensure the judiciary being forced into the only conclusion left, JB is innocent. Seems clear cut to me.
-
Mike, you've already waited 9 years for there reply,perhaps that's long enough for there response. I'm sure you could word a letter that will elicit a response?
Does a wait that long for a lack of response indicate that there not going to respond?
I would of thought the proof that SC was alive on the bed with JB outside with the coppers on the front of the papers will probably move the case into focus with the public and ensure the judiciary being forced into the only conclusion left, JB is innocent. Seems clear cut to me.
Original is currently withheld under pii, which excludes copy from being admissible, it is a technical matter which cannot easily be overcome with any certainty, meaning that disclosure of copy would not guarantee acceptance in a court of law...
-
Mike, the law adopts the "best evidence" rule - if an original document (photograph) is not obtainable (for whatever reason) a copy of the document is admissible in evidence - this is trite law !!!
-
Original is currently withheld under pii, which excludes copy from being admissible, it is a technical matter which cannot easily be overcome with any certainty, meaning that disclosure of copy would not guarantee acceptance in a court of law...
Kind of catch 22. I had a girlfriend like that... You show me yours and I'll show you mine.....
She was a lying bitch ;D
-
Mike, the law adopts the "best evidence" rule - if an original document (photograph) is not obtainable (for whatever reason) a copy of the document is admissible in evidence - this is trite law !!!
if the original was being withheld under pii, that rule might not apply...
-
if the original was being withheld under pii, that rule might not apply...
By that,it might. Sounds like we need a legal ruling on this one.....
-
By that,it might. Sounds like we need a legal ruling on this one.....
A legal ruling or reference / reliance upon a previous case judgement dealing with the same /similar matter, yes...
-
Mike, do you seriously think that any newspaper in the land would refuse to publish the photograph if you supplied them with the photograph?
-
A legal ruling or reference / reliance upon a previous case judgement dealing with the same /similar matter, yes...
Or indeed on this case / evidence. If the evidence is accepted because as you say,the original isn't available because of pii, then you win and JBs out. If the evidence is not accepted,the proof he's innocent is in the public domain,but he's still in prison.you do nothing,he's still in prison. Can't lose.worst case scenario JB is still inside...
-
Mike, do you seriously think that any newspaper in the land would refuse to publish the photograph if you supplied them with the photograph?
Yes, for a variety of reasons
-
Yes, for a variety of reasons
The Sun will not publish the photo because as we all know the upright moral characters of their reporters as they refused to publish other alleged pictures of Sheila in compromising positions.
Strange thing though. Many people are willing to believe that those other pictures of Sheila existed and yet not one of them have seen them. Yet not many believe Mike when he swears that he has seen a picture of Sheila on the bed. Makes me wonder. Are we REALLY governed by cold hard evidence? Or are we all reall governed by prejudice?
-
The Sun will not publish the photo because as we all know the upright moral characters of their reporters as they refused to publish other alleged pictures of Sheila in compromising positions.
Strange thing though. Many people are willing to believe that those other pictures of Sheila existed and yet not one of them have seen them. Yet not many believe Mike when he swears that he has seen a picture of Sheila on the bed. Makes me wonder. Are we REALLY governed by cold hard evidence? Or are we all reall governed by prejudice?
Mike doesn't just say he's seen it, he says he has a copy, and yet 9 years on refuses to do anything with it. That's why people don't believe him.
-
Mike doesn't just say he's seen it, he says he has a copy, and yet 9 years on refuses to do anything with it. That's why people don't believe him.
Do you believe that DC Clarke told Ann Eaton on the morning of 7th August 1985, within an hour or so of him leaving the scene (WHF), that Sheila's body had been found on the bed?
-
Do you believe that DC Clarke told Ann Eaton on the morning of 7th August 1985, within an hour or so of him leaving the scene (WHF), that Sheila's body had been found on the bed?
I believe Ann Eaton believed he did.
-
I believe Ann Eaton believed he did.
Do you believe he told her (Ann Eaton) Sheila was found on the bed, or not?
(this is not a trick question)...
-
Do you believe he told her (Ann Eaton) Sheila was found on the bed, or not?
(this is not a trick question)...
I haven't read this aspect of the case for a while, but off the top of my head, no I do not believe he did. I think either she misunderstood him (the 'on the far side of the bed' argument) or she was wrong about who it was that had told her.
-
If DC Clarke did not tell Ann Eaton that Sheila's body had been found on the bed, how did Ann Eaton learn this at such short notice from the discovery of the bodies at the scene?
-
If DC Clarke did not tell Ann Eaton that Sheila's body had been found on the bed, how did Ann Eaton learn this at such short notice from the discovery of the bodies at the scene?
In which of her statements does she describe being told?
-
I haven't read this aspect of the case for a while, but off the top of my head, no I do not believe he did. I think either she misunderstood him (the 'on the far side of the bed' argument) or she was wrong about who it was that had told her.
How convenient that every time something needs to be looked into properly, that people come up with the suggestions that "police made errors", or "someone misunderstood what someone else was saying" or "they got mixed up and were a little bit confused"? Lets look at your explanation a bit deeper - you do not believe that DC Clarke told Ann Eaton that Sheila's body had been found on the bed, well she got that information from somebody, or do you think she just made it up off the top of her head? Ann Eaton misunderstood him, how could she have misunderstood him regarding where the body of Sheila had been when he (Clarke) had been into the bedroom at the scene along with DCI "Taff" Jones, Clarke had not been present at the scene when the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and PI "Bob" Miller had attended at 8:44am and when they both saw Sheila's body on the far side of the bed, since DCI Jones and DC Clarke did not arrive at the scene until about 9:05am? How did DC Clarke know what the police surgeon and PI Miller had seen, since there is no evidence at all that Clarke spoke to either of these people whilst at the scene, with that in mind how could he tell Ann Eaton what had been in Dr Craigs mind, and the mind of PI Miller. to enable Ann Eaton to misunderstand what he told her? You add that she could have been wrong about who told her that Sheila's body had been found on the bed - well, the only other person who was at Jeremy's cottage that morning within an hour or so of the police discovering the bodies was Ds "Stan" Jones, and he was the one who found and took possession of a silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene that same morning, along with three other exhibits, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4. In any event Ann Eaton describes having been told by a police officer that Sheila's body was found on the bed, and guess what the police did, yes they burned all the blankets and the mattress from the bed, and the piece of carpet that Sheila's body ended up being placed upon and stage managed, they burnt all this evidence on a bonfire in the grounds of whf, just to make sure that nobody could come along at a later date to reconstruct what the police had done?
Ann Eaton found out that Sheila's body had been on the bed, and she found this out pretty close to the time the police had discovered the bodies at the scene, whether it be two bodies downstairs and three upstairs, or as the case may be, one body downstairs and four upstairs. And, she was right about Sheila's body being on the bed...
-
Almost everything that could place Sheila's body on the bed, was either destroyed, worded ambiguously so that what had been said had more than one interpretation, or is being withheld under pii...
-
Any chance you could answer my question? The only reference I can find from Ann as to how she was told is in her COLP interview in 1991, and in which she isn't at all sure who told her, and it's not clear when she was told either.
-
I'm looking at this:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=497.0;attach=18917;image)
What are you looking at?
-
I'm looking at this:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=497.0;attach=18917;image)
What are you looking at?
Ann Eatons handwritten notes that she made up on cards contemporaneously as and when events unfolded...
-
How convenient that every time something needs to be looked into properly, that people come up with the suggestions that "police made errors", or "someone misunderstood what someone else was saying" or "they got mixed up and were a little bit confused"? Lets look at your explanation a bit deeper - you do not believe that DC Clarke told Ann Eaton that Sheila's body had been found on the bed, well she got that information from somebody, or do you think she just made it up off the top of her head? Ann Eaton misunderstood him, how could she have misunderstood him regarding where the body of Sheila had been when he (Clarke) had been into the bedroom at the scene along with DCI "Taff" Jones, Clarke had not been present at the scene when the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and PI "Bob" Miller had attended at 8:44am and when they both saw Sheila's body on the far side of the bed, since DCI Jones and DC Clarke did not arrive at the scene until about 9:05am? How did DC Clarke know what the police surgeon and PI Miller had seen, since there is no evidence at all that Clarke spoke to either of these people whilst at the scene, with that in mind how could he tell Ann Eaton what had been in Dr Craigs mind, and the mind of PI Miller. to enable Ann Eaton to misunderstand what he told her? You add that she could have been wrong about who told her that Sheila's body had been found on the bed - well, the only other person who was at Jeremy's cottage that morning within an hour or so of the police discovering the bodies was Ds "Stan" Jones, and he was the one who found and took possession of a silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene that same morning, along with three other exhibits, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4. In any event Ann Eaton describes having been told by a police officer that Sheila's body was found on the bed, and guess what the police did, yes they burned all the blankets and the mattress from the bed, and the piece of carpet that Sheila's body ended up being placed upon and stage managed, they burnt all this evidence on a bonfire in the grounds of whf, just to make sure that nobody could come along at a later date to reconstruct what the police had done?
Ann Eaton found out that Sheila's body had been on the bed, and she found this out pretty close to the time the police had discovered the bodies at the scene, whether it be two bodies downstairs and three upstairs, or as the case may be, one body downstairs and four upstairs. And, she was right about Sheila's body being on the bed...
Yes I've noticed that as well. It's called cherry picking.
-
Do you believe he told her (Ann Eaton) Sheila was found on the bed, or not?
(this is not a trick question)...
Or was she told SC was found on the far side of the bed. Same content,different outcome don't you think?
-
I detect a real reluctance on the part of the antis to actually accept evidence that is set before them. When such evidence is presented to them they always plead "unclear". Really amusing to watch really. ::)
-
Or was she told SC was found on the far side of the bed. Same content,different outcome don't you think?
Anne Eaton appears to have remembered enough details as to mention in her statement that both Sheila and June were ON the bed with the gun between them and the bible on her chest. She must have been really deaf to have deviated from that statement to "on the far side of the bed".
-
Ann Eatons handwritten notes that she made up on cards contemporaneously as and when events unfolded...
Her contemporaneously written notes are here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1677.0.html
Where does she mention Mick Clarke telling her that on the 7th?
-
I detect a real reluctance on the part of the antis to actually accept evidence unsupported speculation that is set before them. When such evidence unsupported speculation is presented to them they always plead "unclear". Really amusing to watch really. ::)
Fixed that for you :)
-
Her contemporaneously written notes are here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1677.0.html
Where does she mention Mick Clarke telling her that on the 7th?
It doesn't really matter. It's in her official statement.
-
It doesn't really matter. It's in her official statement.
Which official statement?
-
Fixed that for you :)
I detect a real reluctance on the part of the antis to actually accept evidence unsupported speculation that is set before them. When such evidence unsupported speculation is presented to them they always plead "unclear". Really amusing to watch really.
:-\ I had better go for a coffee. Even though I don't drink instant coffee.
-
Her contemporaneously written notes are here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1677.0.html
Where does she mention Mick Clarke telling her that on the 7th?
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1677.0;attach=13930;image
-
Fixed that for you :)
I was referring to Ann Eaton's official statement. Are you going to edit that too? Oh I forgot. You did.
-
Which official statement?
Erm the one you just linked to?
-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1677.0;attach=13930;image
Nice find Mike. When will these people start looking at EVIDENCE fairly?
-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1677.0;attach=13930;image
How did Ann Eaton know that Sheila was on the bed with the bible on her chest in order to enter the details in her contemporaneously recorded notes, and where did she get the information from that she had been shot under the chin, and that the rifle was on the bed next to Sheila's body, if the police did not tell her this?
-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1677.0;attach=13930;image
That particular note is clearly a compilation of her understanding of events on whatever date it was written. It doesn't mention speaking to Mick Clarke, let alone what he might have told her.
-
How did Ann Eaton know that Sheila was on the bed with the bible on her chest in order to enter the details in her contemporaneously recorded notes, and where did she get the information from that she had been shot under the chin, and that the rifle was on the bed next to Sheila's body, if the police did not tell her this?
How very odd, that Ann Eaton makes reference in these handwritten notes, to Sheila's body being on the bed, with a bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed beside her, and the fact that she had been shot under the chin, and that when PI "Bob" Miller testified at the opening of the inquest (14th August 1985) in the presence of Mr Thompkin (Deputy Coroner) that police believed Sheila shot and killed the others, and that she then killed herself by way of a solitary shot under the chin? It should also be pointed out that the police surgeon who mistakenly pronounced Sheila as being dead at the scene in the bedroom at 8:44am (her body being described rather ambiguously as being on the far side of the bed) said that Sheila had what appeared to be a solitary wound to her neck...
Ann Eaton told COLP that DC Clarke had told her that Sheila's body was found on the bed, nobody else who had been at the scene in the bedroom was present at Jeremy's cottage who could have told Ann Eaton that, only DS "Stan" Jones, so if the police told her Sheila's body was found on the bed, it could only have come from either Clarke or Jones, because no other police officer attended Jeremy's cottage on the morning of the shootings...
-
Ann Eaton told COLP that DC Clarke had told her that Sheila's body was found on the bed, nobody else who had been at the scene in the bedroom was present at Jeremy's cottage who could have told Ann Eaton that, only DS "Stan" Jones, so if the police told her Sheila's body was found on the bed, it could only have come from either Clarke or Jones, because no other police officer attended Jeremy's cottage on the morning of the shootings...
Where does she say she was told this information at Jeremy's cottage? Is that in the COLP statement somewhere?
-
Ann Eaton makes reference in these handwritten notes . . .
Do you believe that Ann Eaton is now unaware of the contents of her notes (in relation to where Sheila was found), or now believes they were inaccurate?
-
Where does she say she was told this information at Jeremy's cottage? Is that in the COLP statement somewhere?
Yes, I believe it is mentioned in at least one or more versions of her witness statement...
-
Do you believe that Ann Eaton is now unaware of the contents of her notes (in relation to where Sheila was found), or now believes they were inaccurate?
Yes...
She is aware of the contradiction of what she was told by a police officer that morning (7th August 1985), and what the evidence was that was given during the trial (October 1986) by the police. She is intelligent enough to realize that the police have not been entirely honest about what they told her, and what the court was told, and more importantly what is shown in the disclosed crime scene photographs, which depict Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, with the rifles barrel in different positions against Sheila's neck and the bible displaced and repositioned against the top part of her right arm, and the adjustment of the hem of Sheila's nightdress. I think like all the other relatives who were not happy with the handling of the original investigation, when it was headed by DCI "Taff" Jones, they have no complaints to make about the way the second part of the investigation was handled even if there are parts which contradict what they were originally told, or found out about. This is the same woman who along with other relatives kicked off alarmingly when more insignificant contradictions presented themselves during the first investigation, yet now with such glaring inconsistencies and irregularities, and contradictions, they appear passive, and care little for how this could or might impact upon the safety or otherwise of these convictions. I think as things stand at the moment she and the other relatives, favours the "Noble cause corruption" approach...
-
Nice find Mike. When will these people start looking at EVIDENCE fairly?
When Mike downloads it? The photos MT is withholding, is that evidence? It's certainly not fair he's withholding it and assisting the imprisonment of JB.
-
When Mike downloads it? The photos MT is withholding, is that evidence? It's certainly not fair he's withholding it and assisting the imprisonment of JB.
I again am referring to Ann Eaton's written statement, not any kind of photograph. Would you agree to the posting of a photograph on this forum which shows Sheila with no underwear on? Is that the kind of proof you want?
Well I likewisewill not belive that there are nude photos of Sheila that JB was supposed to have tried to sell to some puritanical Sun reporter until I see them posted on this forum. ;)
-
I again am referring to Ann Eaton's written statement, not any kind of photograph. Would you agree to the posting of a photograph on this forum which shows Sheila with no underwear on? Is that the kind of proof you want?
Well I likewisewill not belive that there are nude photos of Sheila that JB was supposed to have tried to sell to some puritanical Sun reporter until I see them posted on this forum. ;)
Yeah, can anybody post them for us all to look at (reluctantly)?
-
Yeah, can anybody post them for us all to look at (reluctantly)?
Personally I have no interest at all in seeing them. It's your refusal to give them to the defence that baffles me.
-
I again am referring to Ann Eaton's written statement, not any kind of photograph. Would you agree to the posting of a photograph on this forum which shows Sheila with no underwear on? Is that the kind of proof you want?
Well I likewisewill not belive that there are nude photos of Sheila that JB was supposed to have tried to sell to some puritanical Sun reporter until I see them posted on this forum. ;)
No idea mate. I'm just referring to the get out of jail picture.....
-
Personally I have no interest at all in seeing them. It's your refusal to give them to the defence that baffles me.
I think he was referring to the other alleged photos Bridget.
-
No idea mate. I'm just referring to the get out of jail picture.....
Sorry Tony I thought your post was in reply to mine?
Quote from: grahame on Today at 12:56 PM
Nice find Mike. When will these people start looking at EVIDENCE fairly?
Qute from: Tonyb
When Mike downloads it? The photos MT is withholding, is that evidence? It's certainly not fair he's withholding it and assisting the imprisonment of JB.
-
I think he was referring to the other alleged photos Bridget.
I think Bridget was aware of that Roch. She was just saying that it would be more profitable if Mike gave "the" photo in his possession to the defence?
-
Sorry Tony I thought your post was in reply to mine?
Quote from: grahame on Today at 12:56 PM
Nice find Mike. When will these people start looking at EVIDENCE fairly?
Qute from: Tonyb
When Mike downloads it? The photos MT is withholding, is that evidence? It's certainly not fair he's withholding it and assisting the imprisonment of JB.
Yes G, i can see where the confusion lies, I'd like to look at EVIDENCE fairly when that EVIDENCE is presented to me,not take the word of someone.Mike been avoiding presenting the picture when on many occasions he's said he will and he's had said picture for 9+ years by his own admission.this is the get out of Jail picture if it is what it is said to be.
the only item i am refering to in my reply G is the Photo.
I Know nobody believes it exists in the form Mike states but he assures me it does so i am eager to view it. With this evidence of one bullet wound to the neck and SC on the bed it PROVES JB was outside when the fatal shot was fired....
I'M ABSOLUTLY AMAZED NOBODY ELSE REALISE'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PHOTO.
WHERE ARE ALL THE SUPPORTERS SCREAMING FOR THIS EVIDENCE TO BE RELEASED?
-
Yes G, i can see where the confusion lies, I'd like to look at EVIDENCE fairly when that EVIDENCE is presented to me,not take the word of someone.Mike been avoiding presenting the picture when on many occasions he's said he will and he's had said picture for 9+ years by his own admission.this is the get out of Jail picture if it is what it is said to be.
the only item i am refering to in my reply G is the Photo.
I Know nobody believes it exists in the form Mike states but he assures me it does so i am eager to view it. With this evidence of one bullet wound to the neck and SC on the bed it PROVES JB was outside when the fatal shot was fired....
I'M ABSOLUTLY AMAZED NOBODY ELSE REALISE'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PHOTO.
WHERE ARE ALL THE SUPPORTERS SCREAMING FOR THIS EVIDENCE TO BE RELEASED?
I DO, AND I'M HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Yes G, i can see where the confusion lies, I'd like to look at EVIDENCE fairly when that EVIDENCE is presented to me,not take the word of someone.Mike been avoiding presenting the picture when on many occasions he's said he will and he's had said picture for 9+ years by his own admission.this is the get out of Jail picture if it is what it is said to be.
the only item i am refering to in my reply G is the Photo.
I Know nobody believes it exists in the form Mike states but he assures me it does so i am eager to view it. With this evidence of one bullet wound to the neck and SC on the bed it PROVES JB was outside when the fatal shot was fired....
I'M ABSOLUTLY AMAZED NOBODY ELSE REALISE'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PHOTO.
WHERE ARE ALL THE SUPPORTERS SCREAMING FOR THIS EVIDENCE TO BE RELEASED?
Yes I agree with you about the photo. But I don't want it to be posted on here. I would rather as you would too that Mike takes it to the proper authorities. They would know what yo do with it. Personally I would have thought it better if Mike hadn't have mentioned that he was in possession of such a photo. I can accept that he has seen it much more than he is in possession of it. This claim seems to have caused a lot of trouble for him amd us as JB supporters?
-
Yes I agree with you about the photo. But I don't want it to be posted on here. I would rather as you would too that Mike takes it to the proper authorities. They would know what yo do with it. Personally I would have thought it better if Mike hadn't have mentioned that he was in possession of such a photo. I can accept that he has seen it much more than he is in possession of it. This claim seems to have caused a lot of trouble for him amd us as JB supporters?
And JB 9 extra years of porridge for breakfast.
-
And JB 9 extra years of porridge for breakfast.
As long as he get his condensed milk on it.
-
As long as he get his condensed milk on it.
URGH !!
Grahame....
condensed milk YUK
-
URGH !!
Grahame....
condensed milk YUK
Much nicer spread on bread. So I understand!!!
-
Much nicer spread on bread. So I understand!!!
my god... your all MAD !!!!
im just going to butter up some weetabix for my tea... ;D
-
URGH !!
Grahame....
condensed milk YUK
Well I don't know what these prisoners eat.
-
my god... your all MAD !!!!
im just going to butter up some weetabix for my tea... ;D
Weetabix and butter. Now you're talking.
-
. . . With this evidence of one bullet wound to the neck . . .
I think mike tesko was saying that his recent informant had shown him such a photograph, whereas the photograph he already had was a different photograph that didn't indicate there was only one bullet wound (possibly because there wasn't an unobstructed view of Sheila's neck).
-
Oh Reader, I must be entirely mistaken in my understandng of the matter.
I understood that Mike was in possession of a photograph which depicted an unobstructed view of Sheila's neck showing only a single bullet wound to Sheila's neck. Indeed, I strongly suspect that quite a significant number of users of this forum were of the same understanding.
Perhaps Mike would care to clarify the position for us all - does Mike have in his possession or control (for example,on his computer) a photograph that depicts an unobstructed view of Sheila's neck showing only a single bullet wound to Sheila's neck?
Mike, I feel constrained to observe that if you are unable to answer that question in the affirmative, surely, even your own supporters, will feel badly let down. I am, however, sure that you will be in a position to answer that question in the affirmative but I would be grateful if you would provide the requisite clarification.
-
I think mike tesko was saying that his recent informant had shown him such a photograph, whereas the photograph he already had was a different photograph that didn't indicate there was only one bullet wound (possibly because there wasn't an unobstructed view of Sheila's neck).
That may be wher he's trying to wriggle to now, but mike has assured me he has the photo,showing clearly,only one wound to SCs neck and the fatal shot yet to be administered.
If he indeed sent the original to JB and it's inexplicably got lost in the post we have the electronic copies that Mike has on the hard drives to fall back on. It's only a feeling but I don't think Mikes stupid enough to send the original... I'd have sent a copy and kept the original in safekeeping personally.
-
Mike has been saying for ages that he has a photo of Sheila on the bed with no blood on her face and her nightie hitched up (no mention of only one wound). It wasn't until the introduction of 'Z' that a photo depicting Sheila on the bed with one wound to the neck was mentioned, and he's always said that 'Z' didn't give him a copy. Therefore, Mike doesn't have a picture of Sheila on the bed with only one wound.
That said, I do recall seeing him tell you that he had tonyb.
-
Mike has been saying for ages that he has a photo of Sheila on the bed with no blood on her face and her nightie hitched up (no mention of only one wound). It wasn't until the introduction of 'Z' that a photo depicting Sheila on the bed with one wound to the neck was mentioned, and he's always said that 'Z' didn't give him a copy. Therefore, Mike doesn't have a picture of Sheila on the bed with only one wound.
That said, I do recall seeing him tell you that he had tonyb.
yes,he's told me many times,on and off forum,he has the picture.
just astonished he's had it for over 9 years,more than 3,000 bowls of porridge.
with or without condensed milk even G would never want to see oats again...
-
First we have to know where the photo is?
1. essex police HQ
2. or in other police stations in essex?
3. CCPS or thing bob
4. special branch
5. the Inspector handling WHF has them!
6. the local reporter that had taken photos that morning, has copies at his house....?
-
Don't forget 7 & 8
7. JBs prison file ( that's where mike says JBs and the original copy ) is being held, having not been disclosed
8. Mike assures me the photo clearly showing one wound,the fatal second shot yet to be administered,is on his hard drive. No explanation,apart from the vagina view ( easily obscured ) why the photo hasn't surfaced.
-
Mike has been saying for ages that he has a photo of Sheila on the bed with no blood on her face and her nightie hitched up (no mention of only one wound). It wasn't until the introduction of 'Z' that a photo depicting Sheila on the bed with one wound to the neck was mentioned, and he's always said that 'Z' didn't give him a copy. Therefore, Mike doesn't have a picture of Sheila on the bed with only one wound.
That said, I do recall seeing him tell you that he had tonyb.
I have seen a copy of the photograph of Sheila on the bed, with only one wound - this is why when I now answer posts made by other members I try to break them down into segments so that I can deal with a specific point, rather than generalize as I did in the instance you are referring to. For the record, I do not have a copy of Sheila on the bed with only one wound visible, but I have seen such a photograph. In the photograph I had possession of before I sent it to Jeremy, there was no blood running and leaking or pouring from the sides of her mouth, as is shown in some of the police photographs taken when they moved her body to the bedroom floor...
-
Mike, I have two Questions:
1. Did you you previously indicate that you had preserved on the hard drive of your computer a copy of a photograph depicting Sheila on the bed with a single bullet wound ?
2. Do you have (either on the hard drive of your computer or elsewhere within your possession, control or custody) a photograph which depicts Sheila on the bed?
-
I have seen a copy of the photograph of Sheila on the bed, with only one wound - this is why when I now answer posts made by other members I try to break them down into segments so that I can deal with a specific point, rather than generalize as I did in the instance you are referring to. For the record, I do not have a copy of Sheila on the bed with only one wound visible, but I have seen such a photograph. In the photograph I had possession of before I sent it to Jeremy, there was no blood running and leaking or pouring from the sides of her mouth, as is shown in some of the police photographs taken when they moved her body to the bedroom floor...
I don't know what to say.
Bullshitting about the photo.
I mean,I knew he was,I just didn't think he'd admit it
Takes a big man Mike....
Just wish you'd of done it sooner...
-
I have seen a copy of the photograph of Sheila on the bed, with only one wound - this is why when I now answer posts made by other members I try to break them down into segments so that I can deal with a specific point, rather than generalize as I did in the instance you are referring to. For the record, I do not have a copy of Sheila on the bed with only one wound visible, but I have seen such a photograph. In the photograph I had possession of before I sent it to Jeremy, there was no blood running and leaking or pouring from the sides of her mouth, as is shown in some of the police photographs taken when they moved her body to the bedroom floor...
You know what,I'm fucking gutted about this. It's really pissed me off.
A major chunk of evidence disappears into dust.
Don't think Harry Houdini would help now,never mind Mr.Bongo....
-
Mike, I have two Questions:
1. Did you you previously indicate that you had preserved on the hard drive of your computer a copy of a photograph depicting Sheila on the bed with a single bullet wound ?
2. Do you have (either on the hard drive of your computer or elsewhere within your possession, control or custody) a photograph which depicts Sheila on the bed?
I may have inadvertently said that I could provide a copy of the photographs of Sheila on the bed with only one wound, but if i did it was because I have / had been shown such a photographs by an informant, and I was responding in general terms to a series of questions asked of me over a period of time / and at that specific moment. But I did take possession of one of the photographs loaned to Ewen Smith by Essex police at the beginning of 2003, that he was allowed to see / keep temporarily on the basis that he did not copy or show the contents to anyone else. These photographs were the ones not previously disclosed by the police, and which formed part and parcel of the so called and aptly named, "SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ALBUM" containing all 581 pictures. I took possession of one such photograph not with the intention of seeking to permanently deprive Ewen or the police of it, but with the sole intention of giving it to Jeremy who I thought deserved to see it and know about it. He deserved to see it, and know about it, because he was in prison serving a life sentence based on the police finding his sisters body on the bedroom floor. When I saw the photograph of Sheila on the bed, contained in that top secret album I was shocked, shocked beyond belief, with no gun and no bible upon her body or next to her body? I knew I had to have possession of it to send to Jeremy. I removed it from the album and slipped it into my bag - Ewen did not know I had taken it, or the reasons why I had removed it and taken it. I never intended to keep this picture all for myself, it was always my intention to send it to Jeremy, and this is what I did. Later that evening when I got back home, Jeremy contacted me by telephone as he used to do frequently during that particular period and I recounted to him what I had seen at Ewens office - it should be pointed out that because Jeremy was / is a category A prisoner (a triple category a prisoner I might add) that all his calls were being monitored and recorded as is normal practice. I did not tell him over the phone that I had got the actual copy I was was talking about, I simply told him that I had seen such a copy. I told him that it was shocking to see Sheila on the bed wearing no panties. I described to him in the best way possible how Sheila looked on the bed in the photograph I had seen and got possession of - I was actually looking at the photograph of Sheila on the bed, when I was speaking to Jeremy on the phone describing what was depicted in the photograph I was looking at, and I mentioned that she was not wearing any underwear, and that the person who took the picture was standing about a foot or two away from the foot of the bed so that it showed a view of Sheila on the bed, and that there was no blood running and leaking from the corners of her mouth at that stage. Jeremy then told me that this was important evidence and that in fact Ann Eaton had found Sheila's panties in a bucket of cold water soaking in the kitchen at the scene. I did not know about this until I spoke to Jeremy on this occasion. He sounded rally angry that Ewen had kept this evidence from him and he told me that he would be writing to Ewen Smith immediately. I decided to send the photograph along with a short note explaining the circumstances of how I came into possession of it, to Jeremy by first post in the morning. before I did that I scanned the picture and saved it on the hard drive of my computer. I knew that as soon as Ewen received the latter from Jeremy about all of this that Ewen would discover that I had removed the photographs in question, so I off loaded it to Jeremy as soon as I could. I later received a letter from Jeremy which was very abusive, calling me all the names under the sun for fucking up his arrangement with GDS, by sending communications to him under the privileged rule of standing order 5B 32 (c) or something like that...
Jeremy was hopping mad that by me sending a communication under the aforementioned rule, that it had prevented similar communications between himself and GDs who he had secretly been making arrangements for to represent his interests, because he was getting rid of Ewen Smith, who he believed was working with the authorities against his best interests. The upshot of it all was that the prison authorities had intercepted my communication containing the said photograph and note, and they told Jeremy he was not allowed to see its contents and that it would be placed upon his prison file. So I gathered from what Jeremy was telling me in his abusive letter that the prison authorities had now got the very photographs which showed Sheila on the bed, and it was being retained on Jeremy's prison file...
I have retained all the letters Jeremy wrote to me at this time, and later...
These are the general facts of how I came to see and take possession of the photograph of Sheila on the bed with no blood running or leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth at a time when her body was laid upon the bed - and I am not bothered if no-one believes me. At lest I know that Jeremy believed hat i was telling him about me having seen such a photograph - the contents of our letters from that moment and point onwards clearly was taken up by the fact that I saw such a photograph. I know that Jeremy has kept every letter I have ever written to him, and I have done the same likewise, so it is all there in our letters to each other...
Why would I have made something like this / that up?
-
I ain't even going to bother read it mike,u said you had it,you had fuck all,let's face it.
-
Well, it's ok Mike because, as you state, a copy is preserved on the hard drive of your computer.
Can you please retrieve it from your hard drive and post it on the forum?
-
I ain't even going to bother read it mike,u said you had it,you had fuck all,let's face it.
Well don't read it, fuck off, you asked a question at a time when I was being bombarded with questions about the photograph I had been shown by my informant that shows Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck - I don't fucking care what you or anybody else thinks, I have only had physical possession of one photograph of Sheila on the bed, which clearly shows her with no blood running and leaking from the corners of her mouth. I have tried to explain how this misunderstanding has come about, but there are some like yourself who appear intent on trying to muddy the waters more than they are already muddied...
-
I can see a few clown comments getting traded on the cards here :-\
-
Well don't read it, fuck off, you asked a question at a time when I was being bombarded with questions about the photograph I had been shown by my informant that shows Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck - I don't fucking care what you or anybody else thinks, I have only had physical possession of one photograph of Sheila on the bed, which clearly shows her with no blood running and leaking from the corners of her mouth. I have tried to explain how this misunderstanding has come about, but there are some like yourself who appear intent on trying to muddy the waters more than they are already muddied...
Misunderstanding? Muddied waters? Youve had plenty of chances to come clean Mike. I'm just glad you've filtered out the shit,hopefully for good.
-
I can see a few clown comments getting traded on the cards here :-\
Aaww Roch, your so sweet,dont despair,if you remember I did get a unicycle for my birthday. ;)
-
Aaww Roch, your so sweet,dont despair,if you remember I did get a unicycle for my birthday. ;)
I was just recalling the last time there was a bust up. It was something to do with clown insults.
-
I was just recalling the last time there was a bust up. It was something to do with clown insults.
Sorry Roch,mike did say that referring to me as a fucking moronic idiot scumbag clown could of been a compliment. This amused me a lot and have used this line ( with his permission ) many,many times. ;D
-
fucking moronic idiot scumbag clown
It's a classic ::)
-
There are some posters who appear intent on trying to show that I have been making up stories about the photograph of Sheila on the bed. I am asked questions which sometimes it is impossible to answer because I have been or am asked slightly different questions involving the same or similar matters which I have failed to respond to, and I have been trying to be careful not to answer anything which could be taken out of context, or misinterpreted, but it is hard sometimes to answer questions that elicit answers which can easily be twisted to mean something other than what was intended. This particular feature where we are currently at, is one such matter - I have always said that the photograph I saw and took possession of at Ewen Smiths office at the beginning of 2003, did not show any blood leaking and running and pouring from the corners of her mouth, and I have always said and maintained that I was shown a photograph by an informant of Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck, now I cannot put it any clearer than that. Now, if there are some amongst you who choose to believe something different, well basically fuck off and leave me alone. Stop trying to trip me up and to get me to say something which can be twisted to mean something else. The police fucking shot Sheila and I don't particularly care if all the kings horses and all the kings men say or believe I said anything different, unknowingly, without it amounting to some sort of misunderstanding, or as a result of a misinterpretation, or a mix up...
-
I did think that the lines got blurred, some time after the alleged single shot photo got introduced and when you stated that the photo sent to prison was also stored on the hard drives. That was never the single shot photo but apparently the double shot photo.
What's the chance of of the double shot photo being shown on the forum?
-
Mike. Now,if you don't mind my suggestion,draw a line under the whole SC photo on the bed. I'm happy now I've heard the truth.as I started the thread I've no objection to it being locked.
-
Mike. Now,if you don't mind my suggestion,draw a line under the whole SC photo on the bed. I'm happy now I've heard the truth.as I started the thread I've no objection to it being locked.
I will say the following on the matter, and you will be well advised to take note of what I am saying - The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I have taken control of back in 2003, shows Sheila with pubic hair in her most private parts. Now I am not seeking to try and make out that there is anything sexual in what I am saying, I am merely pointing out that she was unshaven or untrimmed - now anybody who wants to know the truth (especially those in high places, and in positions of influence) only has to find out if what I have described was / is the truth?
-
Mike. Now,if you don't mind my suggestion,draw a line under the whole SC photo on the bed. I'm happy now I've heard the truth.as I started the thread I've no objection to it being locked.
Sorry, so is that it then? There is no photo at all on any hard drive? Some photos exist but nobody has them? And what about the other member of the forum that had seen this photo?
-
I will say the following on the matter, and you will be well advised to take note of what I am saying - The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I have taken control of back in 2003, shows Sheila with pubic hair in her most private parts. Now I am not seeking to try and make out that there is anything sexual in what I am saying, I am merely pointing out that she was unshaven or untrimmed - now anybody who wants to know the truth (especially those in high places, and in positions of influence) only has to find out if what I have described was / is the truth?
Without being too specific, or intend to appear rude or perverted, but I would also like to add that there was no evidence that a tampon had been internally inserted, in the photograph I have taken control and possession of back at the beginning of 2003 from Ewen Smith (at his offices in Birmingham) - Now any of you can choose to believe anything you want to, I don't particularly care any more...
I am getting fucking fed up of telling the truth and being accused of all manner of things...
-
Without being too specific, or intend to appear rude or perverted, but I would also like to add that there was no evidence that a tampon had been internally inserted, in the photograph I have taken control and possession of back at th beginning of 2003 from Ewen Smith - Now any of you can choose to believe anything you want to, I don't particularly care any more...
I am getting fucking fed up of telling the truth and being accused of all manner of things...
But is this the photo that you have? I am not trying to accuse or question, just clarify. Doleyglassback once 'shouted' at me about the the existence of a photo like this
-
Without being too specific, or intend to appear rude or perverted, but I would also like to add that there was no evidence that a tampon had been internally inserted, in the photograph I have taken control and possession of back at the beginning of 2003 from Ewen Smith (at his offices in Birmingham) - Now any of you can choose to believe anything you want to, I don't particularly care any more...
I am getting fucking fed up of telling the truth and being accused of all manner of things...
Can't accuse me of getting confused on this though Mike...
mike tesko
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 12953
Re: How I Iost the photo` of Sheila on the Bed...
« Reply #79 on: April 29, 2012, 01:45:PM »
Quote
Quote from: mike tesko on April 29, 2012, 01:42:PM
Well, its good news ( I think) because the computer onto which the picture was copied, although an old system, is in storage and I may be able to recover the file in question...
I am taking advice...
Before I sent the photograph to Jeremy at the beginning of 2004, I copied it onto one of my old computer which used a different operating system...
Report to moderator Logged
-
Sorry, so is that it then? There is no photo at all on any hard drive? Some photos exist but nobody has them? And what about the other member of the forum that had seen this photo?
No, no, no, I do have a copy of the said photograph I took possession of from Ewen Smith back at the beginning of 2003, but I don't have a copy of the picture shown to me by an informant which shows only one wound to Sheila's neck (on one of my old hard drives). However, the copy of the picture I have of Sheila on the bed shows no blood running and leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth, and running back into her left eye socket. Can I ask you something - do you realize the significance of what I am saying and describing?
-
But is this the photo that you have? I am not trying to accuse or question, just clarify. Doleyglassback once 'shouted' at me about the the existence of a photo like this
Yes that's the photo he says he has on the hard drives. The angle he is describing would not show a good view of her neck, so he probably doesn't know how many wounds there are on that photo.
-
No, no, no, I do have a copy of the said photograph I took possession of from Ewen Smith back at the beginning of 2003, but I don't have a copy of the picture shown to me by an informant which shows only one wound to Sheila's neck. However, the copy of the picture I have of Sheila on the bed shows no blood running and leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth, and running back into her left eye socket. Can I ask you something - do you realize the significance of what I am saying and describing?
Mike.
Make it simple for me
Is the picture on your hard drive the one with SC,one bullet wound,with the fatal shot yet to be administered ?
-
No, no, no, I do have a copy of the said photograph I took possession of from Ewen Smith back at the beginning of 2003, but I don't have a copy of the picture shown to me by an informant which shows only one wound to Sheila's neck. However, the copy of the picture I have of Sheila on the bed shows no blood running and leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth, and running back into her left eye socket. Can I ask you something - do you realize the significance of what I am saying and describing?
I don't profess to know as much as others on here Mike, but from what you are saying I would assume that this photo would be proof of stage-managing but also the existence of photos that that may not have been seen by the defence? In this photo, where are the bible and the rifle? I'm assuming it's a full length head and body shot of her on the bed?
-
Mike.
Make it simple for me
Is the picture on your hard drive the one with SC,one bullet wound,with the fatal shot yet to be administered ?
The way I took it, it was both wounds. Not the single shot.
-
Yes that's the photo he says he has on the hard drives. The angle he is describing would not show a good view of her neck, so he probably doesn't know how many wounds there are on that photo.
Well, yes, and no, Firstly the person you describe or refer to by the name (mentioned) was shown and did see the picture I am talking about. I personally showed that image to this person, and although there might be some confusion about the angle at which that photograph is taken, as to whether or not there was one wound or two at that stage, what is relevant and significant is that there was no blood and is no blood running, or leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth at that time. Now, why do you think that is the case?
-
Well, yes, and no, Firstly the person you describe or refer to by the name (mentioned) was shown and did see the picture I am talking about. I personally showed that image to this person, and although there might be some confusion about the angle at which that photograph is taken, as to whether or not there was one wound or two at that stage, what is relevant and significant is that there was no blood and is no blood running, or leaking or pouring from the corners of her mouth at that time. Now, why do you think that is the case?
I'm guessing the answer is because she hadn't received the second, fatal shot from the police? (and i'm not being sarcastic if it comes across like that)
-
Mike, it is also very significant if the photo you have preserved on your hard drive shows Sheila ON THE BED with no rifle upon her and no bible next to her - that was your posting at 8.52 pm today
Do you have this photo on your hard drive?
-
Mike.
Make it simple for me
Is the picture on your hard drive the one with SC,one bullet wound,with the fatal shot yet to be administered ?
Listen, without appearing to be rude (which I might be doing on this occasion) I should think that what I am saying and what I have said should be obvious - for example, I have not and never have said that the photograph I took possession of from Ewen Smith at the beginning of 2003, showed only one wound to Sheila's neck. But, what I did say and what I have said is that there was no blood running and leaking and pouring from each corner of her mouth, as she was laid on the bed at that stage. I cannot explain it any simpler than this / that...
-
Mike, it is also very significant if the photo you have preserved on your hard drive shows Sheila ON THE BED with no rifle upon her and no bible next to her - that was your posting at 8.52 pm today
Do you have this photo on your hard drive?
Its on one of my old hard drives, yes. Sheila is on the bed, there is no blood running or leaking from the corners of her mouth, and she is intimately exposed, and the police moved her body to the bedroom floor and made up a false account about finding her body there, when the firearms team entered the main bedroom. It is all fucking bollocks and lies...
The blood which was later photographed to be running and leaking from the corners of her mouth, and back into her left eye socket and from one of the to wounds upon her neck came about through the police moving her body from the bed to the bedroom floor - no doubt at all about it...
-
Its on one of my old hard drives, yes...
It must be a while since you have seen it, I'm not questioning your memory on anything you have said but can you recall where the bible and the rifle were in this photo?
-
It must be a while since you have seen it, I'm not questioning your memory on anything you have said but can you recall where the bible and the rifle were in this photo?
Rifle was not on the body...
-
Well, this photograph is of some evidential significance - I'd have thought that JB's current legal representives would be most interested in seeing it.
Would you mind if I suggested that you devote some time in seeking to retrieve it from your hard drive and forward it to JB's legal team.
If nothing else, this photograph establishes that Sheila was moved from the bed to the floor and begs the question why that was done and, perhaps far more importantly, it establishes that there are perhaps other photographs which have not been disclosed!
-
Well, this photograph is of some evidential significance - I'd have thought that JB's current legal representives would be most interested in seeing it.
Would you mind if I suggested that you devote some time in seeking to retrieve it from your hard drive and forward it to JB's legal team.
If nothing else, this photograph establishes that Sheila was moved from the bed to the floor and begs the question why that was done and, perhaps far more importantly, it establishes that there are perhaps other photographs which have not been disclosed!
Correct...
-
Correct...
So are you going to get it to the defence team? In the yes/no thread did you say you would make public the photo you have within 6 months of my question, is that still the case?
-
The photograph which was posted on the front page of the daily Express some years ago, which Jeremy declared proved that he did not kill his sister, is true but not for the reasons which Jeremy and others thought - the fresh looking blood which was leaking and running and pouring from the corners of her mouth and one of the two (upper) wounds upon her neck, was caused by the police displacing Sheila's body from the bed to the bedroom floor by dynamic process - not because she had very recently just shot and killed herself....
-
So are you going to get it to the defence team? In the yes/no thread did you say you would make public the photo you have within 6 months of my question, is that still the case?
Yes, the clock of justice is ticking...
-
The photograph which was posted on the front page of the daily Express some years ago, which Jeremy declared proved that he did not kill his sister, is true but not for the reasons which Jeremy and others thought - the fresh looking blood which was leaking and running and pouring from the corners of her mouth and one of the two (upper) wounds upon her neck, was caused by the police displacing Sheila's body from the bed to the bedroom floor by dynamic process - not because she had very recently just shot and killed herself....
Will you now post (or at least pass to the defence) the photo on your hard drive?
-
By the time I removed the photograph from the album in Ewens office (2004) . . .
I do have a copy of the said photograph I took possession of from Ewen Smith back at the beginning of 2003, . . .
The above can't both be true. If it was 2004, why have you recently at least twice posted 2003?